Smith v. Olander, 100.
| Decision Date | 03 October 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 100.,100. |
| Citation | 232 N.W. 364,251 Mich. 503 |
| Parties | SMITH v. OLANDER et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Allegan County; Fred T. Miles, Judge.
Suit by Alfred C. Smith, by Maude Davidsmeyer, his next friend, against Oscar G. Olander and George Hay. Judgment for plaintiff against defendant last named only, and plaintiff appeals by case made.
Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Leo W. Hoffman and Clare E. Hoffman, both of Allegan (Carl E. Hoffman, of Holland, of counsel), for appellant.
Wilber M. Brucker, Atty. Gen., and Joseph A. Gillis, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee Olander.
Defendant George Hay, a trooper, duly appointed as such in the state department of public safety, arrested plaintiff, then, without excuse, struck and maltreated him, and, for the assault, was cast in damages. Defendant Oscar G. Olander, commissioner of public safety, and Hay's superior, was also cast in damages but released therefrom by the trial court.
Plaintiff, by case made, presents the question of the liability of defendant Olander to respond in damages for the wrongful act of Hay. The question is without case precedent.
The office of Olander and the employment of Hay have no common-law background. Act No. 123, Public Acts 1921, established a state department of public safety, with a commissioner as its executive head, and empowered him to appoint and discharge a corps of members with grades and duties ‘assimilated to those of captain, lieutenant, sergeant and private in the military service * * * with the powers of a conservator of the peace,’ and, for the purpose of the service of process and of making arrests, with the powers of a deputy sheriff.
The statute also provides:
‘Each such person shall furnish a bond to the state in the same amount, subject to the same conditions and with the same character of sureties, as is required by law of deputy sheriffs.’ Section 6.
The record does not disclose whether such a bond was given by Mr. Hay. We apprehend, however, that it would be rather difficult to give such a bond ‘as is required by law of deputy sheriffs,’ for there is no such law. It is true that sheriffs are empowered to appoint deputies and, because of responsibility for acts of their deputies, they exact bonds; yet such is a personal matter between the sheriff and deputies. The bond feature of the statute appears to be meaningless or, at any rate, of no moment under the issue presented by this record.
Does the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. to Use of Orris v. Roberts
...officer or his bondsmen. This has been repeatedly decided by this and most other courts.' See, also, to similar effect, Smith v. Olander, 251 Mich. 503, 232 N.W. 364. In Union Bank & Trust Co. of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County, 11 Cal.2d 675, 81 P.2d 919, 921, the clerk of the Superior C......
-
Hirych v. State
...The sheriff was held liable for the reckless killing of an innocent person by his personally appointed deputy. In Smith v. Olander, 251 Mich. 503, 232 N.W. 364, defendant was the State Commissioner of Public Safety. One of defendant's troopers had legally arrested plaintiff and then, withou......
-
Reiter v. Illinois Nat. Cas. Co.
...200, 20 L.R.A.,N.S., 274; McKenna v. Kimball, 145 Mass. 555, 14 N.E. 789;Michael v. Smith, 188 Calif. 199, 205 P. 113;Smith v. Olander, 251 Mich. 503, 232 N.W. 364; note 1 A.L.R. 222. From the foregoing it will appear that there could be no personal liability upon the part of appellant Erne......
- Bd. of Cnty. Rd. Com'rs. Wayne Cnty. v. City of Lincoln Park